Jane Goodall and Chimps: Only 'come out' of 'closet' after being put in one.

[MrNorthernstar]

I heard different to this... it happens in the wild too. Gorillas do it all the time. Homosexuality is not culture. How come you get gay people from a huge spectrum of different families and its happened since the beginning of time.

[versus69v2]

5 people are gay

[OneEyedJack1970]

Some female mules are actually fertile. If they get pregnant by a horse, they'll have a horse, but if it's by a donkey, they'll have another mule.

[dannypantsNYC]

Jane Goodall has done wonderful things for chimps and is wonderful person, but her "science" regarding homosexuality among animals is a bit warped. Same sex bonding exists in the animal world, even among chimpanzees, even among wild animals--including wild chimpanzees. Bonobos have been observed in the wild engaging in same sex bonding during their entire life cycle.

[tony42519]

this is gay

[AntiCitizenX]

You really need to educate yourself more.

watch?v=TMlpETvwPrs

[HiveRadical]

Coming from you? I still have a whole swath of information on you and your lies friend. And we both know what I'm talking about. But now you're more entrenched making it less likely that you'll just up and leave so when I do get around to putting the video together your deceptions will be too hard to hide or deny. You've been only spared to this point due to the fact that I'm not letting this consume my life.

But I assure you that I have the goods on you. Watch what you say.

[AntiCitizenX]

@HiveRadical

Watch what I say? Or else what? You'll blackmail me? Sue me? Beat me up? Have God smite me?

Do your worst.

[HiveRadical]

The truth is the worst thing that can happen to you. Have it shown that despite all your pithy complaints about what you claim to be dishonesty in religion you are dishonest to your core and hardly 'objective' or 'scientific' in any of your endeavors here.

Ben, "J to the R" ... to the N.... to the A...

[AntiCitizenX]

OH NOES!  Anything but the nonsensical conspiratorial ranting.

Yawn. Grow up.

[HiveRadical]

This coming from the man who sings -- "Life is super when you're me Doo-dah, doo-dah Everything comes easily Oh-dee-doo-dah-day! Making people feel disgrace Doo-dah, doo-dah Rub my genius in their face Oh-dee-doo-dah-day!" Being called a child by the childish. That's rich. Can I call you Jimmy?

[HiveRadical]

The funny thing about watching your videos JR is how obsessed they make you appear about the truth and overcoming lies. Yet you since your first manifestation on Youtube have been ready, willing and unrepentant about lying to further your ends. How does it feel to be such a hypocrite? To claim that truth and rationality is your guiding light when your whole approach to attacking religion is founded in lies and deception?

[michamus]

@HiveRadical

I would highly recommend you look into bonobo behavior in the wild. They freely exhibit homosexual, and bisexual behavior. In fact, anything sexual seems to be fair game, with the exception of incest.

Dolphins have also exhibited bisexual tendencies in the wild.

The list is actually quite extensive.

[HiveRadical]

@michamus

It's curious that the man considered the leading authority on bonobo behavior, and the one who's most responsible for claiming the 'make love not war' nature of bonobos has only ever studied the species in captivity.

The bonobo has long been a convenient species to cite in this battle because it's so inaccessible in it's (interestingly restricted-almost as if to imitate a kind of captivity) habitat.

[HiveRadical]

@michamus

"Its a long path, and, because its long, there are few people who do it. If it was quicker and easier? There are hundreds of people working with baboons and lemurs, so its not so easy to find your niche. A student working with bonobos can close his eyes and pick a topic, and it cant be wrong. "

This coming from a man engaged in 2007 on the ground, in habitat research essentially saying that bonobo studies in the wild are so lacking that you can &$%

[HiveRadical]

@michamus &$% pick any aspect of bonobos to study and you don't have to worry about stepping on toes or overlapping research, there's simply SOOO LITTLE that's been studied of the species in the wild. And the little that has been observed seems to at least initially to be significantly against the initial press granted the species. The sex is not really ubiquitous and they do fight.

On top of this you have the fact that this is a small population in a restricted region.

[michamus]

@HiveRadical

Denying evidence, and argument from authority? I am disappointed.

Have you ever even done any biology research yourself? There are hundreds of species that exhibit homosexual behavior. Including lions. 6% of all observed male lion mountings are homosexual.

Denial of evidence does not give your position anymore strngth.

[HiveRadical]

@michamus

You seem to be missing the point and thereby engaging in some erroneous conclusions as to what I'm getting at.

I'm not saying that there's not homosexual activity observed in nature. I'm pointing out that perchance it's not what we are led to believe it is. Are you going to hold to your admonition to me to look into bonobo's as observed in the wild?

[HiveRadical]

@michamus 2 As early as 2007 one of the men that was there doing what you recommend was asserting that we lack a great deal of the very thing you are saying I should do.

What makes me wonder about you is your seeming position that things are rather firmly discovered about 23

[HiveRadical]

@michamus 3 the nature of a species that is limited in number and geographic area but still quite mysterious to us because that place is so hard to get to and the subject matter is so hard to observe in it's natural habitat. Are you really trying to imply that we know much definitively about the bonobo? Because I find it a bit incredulous.

[michamus]

@HiveRadical

There is no need to hold to bonobos alone. I provided examples of other species that exhibit homosexual behavior in the wild.

Also, what is this this definitive business? Al;l it takes is the sighting onf ONE wild homosexual act to disprove your claim.

This observation has been made (on multiple accounts) thus you are wrong.

[HiveRadical]

@michamus

michamus my claim is not that there is no homosexual behaviour in the wild, rather that for a significant number of animals, specifically those more closely related in genetic make up to humans, there seems to only be homosexual tendencies exhibited in controlled and artificial environs.

So please don't think you've trumped my arguments when it's clear you do not understand them.

[michamus]

@HiveRadical

"Moving the goal post" gets us nowhere.

The Ostrich defense is no real defense.\

Either homosexuality exists in the wild, or it doesn't. Evidence shows that homosexuality does exist in the wild, therefor homosexuality is natural.

Now if you want sit here and redefine terms, and change your argument so as to read like it does above, then there is no point in further discussion. Especially since primate sexual behavior includes homosexual, and bisexual expression in the wild.

[CarolinaSantacruzO]

@michamus plus, she is saying that domestication and globalizacion can lead to homosexuality in a natural way!

[stengevarsel]

So I'm reading the comments on this video, and it seems that there is a disagreement considering whether homosexuality exists in the animal kingdom or not. Is that the case? If so, someone hasn't been doing his/her homework on the subject.

[SeraphimTheApologist]

Creepy commentary...

[Rh1no1]

Bonobos, on the other hand, are very active with both sexes!

Also, if we are a "domesticated creature" then homosexuality could be inherent in some. In fact, I think it is. I've read a few studies on genes and homosexuality that point to this fact.

ttyl,

Linds

[HiveRadical]

Linds,

Funny story on the bonobo. I went to check the sources given in the wikipedia article in connection with the homosexual promescuity of the bonobo and made a very interesting discovery. While it was very disapointing to find the only sources were a new yorker article and a huffington post article.

The New Yorker Article is rather interesting in what it lays out about the state of bonobo research--

[HiveRadical]

"This pop image of the bonobo—equal parts dolphin, Dalai Lama, and Warren Beatty—has flourished largely in the absence of the animal itself, which was recognized as a species less than a century ago. Two hundred or so bonobos are kept in captivity around the world; but, despite being one of just four species of great ape, along with orangutans, gorillas, and chimpanzees, the wild bonobo has received comparatively little scientific scrutiny. ...

[HiveRadical]

"It is one of the oddities of the bonobo world—and a source of frustration to some—that Frans de Waal, of Emory University, the high-profile Dutch primatologist and writer, who is the most frequently quoted authority on the species, has never seen a wild bonobo."

[HiveRadical]

And then there's Hohmann, one of the few who actually chase arround the bonobo--

Its a long path, and, because its long, there are few people who do it. If it was quicker and easier? There are hundreds of people working with baboons and lemurs, so its not so easy to find your niche. A student working with bonobos can close his eyes and pick a topic, and it cant be wrong.

[HiveRadical]

For some reason the quotation marks didn't show up in that last one. This next part is NOT a continuation of Hohmann-just for clarification.

With reportedly only a few thousand left and their reported restriction by war, conflict, bush meat hunting etc. it is wondered at how close their whole species existence is to the unnatural circumstances referenced by Goodall

[HiveRadical]

So I'm just say'n

When the object of study is on the cutting edge of discover and the principle authority has never seen the object of study outside of captivity one wonders what other unseen forces are at play.

[pozzolane]

This level of ignorance is unforgivable in today's technology age. A simple Google search, or even (god forbid) a trip to ones library, would reveal everything in this video to be almost completely false. The very fact that I have to point this out is...depressing. If Jane is trying to say that domestication is responsible for homosexuality, and that homosexuality is not found in the rest of the (wild) animal kingdom, she fails. Utterly and miserably.

[HiveRadical]

pozz,

I hope you'll forgive my incredulity, but I find it hard to believe you've ever lived for any extended period of time in the presence of raw nature.

Feel free to correct me and direct me to your papers detailing your bona fides, but till that time I hope you'll understand how difficult it is to take a guy at his word who 's bummin' around youtube and dismissing commentary of a woman who's spent her life camped out in the middle of the action.

[pozzolane]

I never said you have to take my word for it. You shouldn't be taking anyone's word for it. Your appeal to authority and attempt to refute my points based on the lack of my own credentials supplied tells me that you have nothing to back your assertions with except the false statements from an old pop figure environmentalist. Don't believe me, do some research of your own. There is video footage on the internet of many different wild animals engaging in homosexual activity. It's easy to find too.

[pozzolane]

Furthermore, Jane Goodall didn't camp out in the woods observing wild nature either. She was "rescuing" chimps at type of chimp care center she founded. She was even naming the chimps. She was (arguably) making pets out of the chimps she was rescuing and domesticating them herself. Based on this, she is hardly qualified to speak about the nature of sexuality of the entire animal kingdom.

[OneEyedJack1970]

Ever heard of bison?

[pozzolane]

"Ever heard of bison?"

Are you serious? A bison is not a "cow in the wild". You know that right? They are in the sub-family bovinae but that does not make them a "wild cow".

@ Angelmarauder.

Your argument is an appeal to authority. My expertise has nothing to do with the points I made. Care to address my points, or are you just going to flap your jaw?

[OneEyedJack1970]

@pozzolane Yeah, I'm serious. Bison are wild cattle. In fact, they can interbreed with domestic cattle.

[pozzolane]

@OneEyedJack1970: They are not the same genus let alone the same species. The result of cross breeding is an infertile hybrid. So no, not a wild "cow". The Term "Cow" implies domestication. They are (using the term loosely) "wild" Bovinae.

[OneEyedJack1970]

@pozzolane "They are not the same genus let alone the same species. "

Neither are bottlenose dolphins and false killer whales, yet they can breed and produce fertile offspring.

"The result of cross breeding is an infertile hybrid."

Not always. First generation female cattle/bison hybrids are often fertile.

[pozzolane]

@OneEyedJack1970

I'm not sure what your point even is, Jack. Putting this particular squabble aside, and if I recall correctly, an old woman who runs a chimpanzee rescue farm makes some astoundingly ignorant broad-stroke comments on mammalian sexuality and the religious zealot nut bars use this to stoke the flames of their anti-gay campaigns.

[OneEyedJack1970]

@pozzolane No point, really. Just having conversation.

[pozzolane]

My respect for Jane Goodall has just taken a serious blow (pun intended). "Wild Cattle"?! Cattle are domesticated animals! Where has she been observing cattle in the wild? Furthermore, for someone who is supposedly an expert on Chimpanzee's, her comment that they exhibit no homosexual behavior in the wild is breathtaking in it's falsity. Wild male chimps can (and do) retract their penises into their body cavities whereby another will then penetrate that cavity (homosexual intercourse).

[angelmarauder]

#1 Feral dog packs = wild dogs....Have you never heard of wild horses, bison, or cattle?

#2 You are trying to discredit an expert on primates with ...what....YOUR expertise perhaps? or perhaps the 'well-known'? Afterall let's look at some other well-known facts: non-aryans are lower lifeforms, Mao's words and works are wisdom and truth, and religion is an opiate for the masses.

The point of this video being posted is to show that general opinions can certainly be flawed.

[MarshalltheArtist]

She cited oxen as an example. I can think of some others, like buffalo and yaks; so wild cattle do exist. Goodall is only human, though, so she shouldn't be trusted any more than other people should.

[pozzolane]

@MarshalltheArtist

I didn't hear her cite "bison". What she meant then is "wild bovine" and not "wild cattle". Cattle are a domesticated bovine. It's not pedantic to expect that a biologist use specific language when speaking in regards to her or his own supposed area of expertise.

[HiveRadical]

You see charlie is that what she points out doesn't even work out by the rational evolutionist's reckoning.

What Ms. Goodall makes plane is that a species in the normal confrontation with natural selection is hurt in it's self propagation when these practices take hold AND that these practices, in a cultural feedback loop, become substantial.

She sees this as, from her angle, a self inflicted evolutionary beating back. I take pause at the idea of institutionalizing such.

[HiveRadical]

Those two points are some of the best points for not distorting the definition of Marriage

The dynamics of same gender pairing are not conducive to perpetuation of humanity. Now if you're a self hating human then that's all good and groovy for you. But government and humans that like humanity in word AND deed want to see human kind remain strong. Demographic trends do not portend strength. And buying into some false illusion of 'equality' while ignoring the implications is a societal death wish

[HiveRadical]

Charlie is missing the core points of import.

It really doesn't matter to me what is or isn't natural. Natural as a sole qualifier, or even a core qualifier, is a poor one for deciding societal governance or cultural goals or hallmarks.

What is truly damning of the position is that the condition works against a species mechanization of self promulgation and replication AND that culturally endorsements are significant feedback loops.

[angelmarauder]

lol. Who down rated your video! Bigots who won't accept anything that stands against their malformed opinions of the universe.

[HiveRadical]

from French bigot (12century) in OldFrench "sanctimonious" supposedly a derogatory name for Normans, the old theory (not universally accepted) being that it springs from their frequent use of OldEnglish oath "bi God."

[angelmarauder]

Hmmm...interesting.

[HiveRadical]

When your "by God/bi got" is some distortion of "Equality" (not true equality for children who are thusly deprived of paternal intimacy from both genders) or what it masks--adults focused more in self-seeking arrangements than in the constructs laid out for the general welfare/equality of children.

[HiveRadical]

When this is your god. Then you penalize or reward information based on that ideological underpinning.

In short, you've shut your mind. You've already determined what is of 'god' and what is not.

Bigot is a very apt label.

[charliemaine01]

other of your standards for "right" or "moral". Having said all of that, my point is just that. If it was proven that, in fact, homosexuality did not occur in the natural state of a species, I would still not think that to be any reason to look down on it as an accepted behavior in modern society or to somehow protect "the holy institution of marraige" (which is in fact another product of our "unnatural" civilized state). But just as one of the many "new" products of modern human society.

[angelmarauder]

@charliemaine01 A major researcher speaking out against the current intellectual bias that homosexuality is prevalent in nature ruins its credibility. You spent 4 comments saying that this is not logical? why? LDS doctrine concerning this is irrelevant to this information.

[charliemaine01]

Not to mention that just the admitance that there was this natural state of homo sapiens existing without society, language, etc., I don't think would fit with the doctrine given by those people that are giving you this "wrong or immoral" standard. I don't know if you're an evolution LDS apologist or whatever, but it seems that the explanation you used to "debunk" the "homosexuality is natural" argument is also in direct contradiction to many doctrines that serve as the foundation for so many

[charliemaine01]

(continuing) I got was not at all that she felt homosexualty was wrong or immoral, but just that (at least she feels) it would not occur in the "natural" behavior of homo sapiens. Not unlike the hundreds and thousands of other common and "moral" behaviors that we are so used to today that are also products of the formation of society (destruction of the "natural" state), such as making donations or helping grandma across the street.

[charliemaine01]

So, your point is that "homosexuality is not natural". Ok, assuming we accept this, her reasoning is that it is a product of a species evolving from its natural state, a product of society, culture, etc. If products of society such as language, laws, customs, organizational structure, medicine, technology, etc. are not morally wrong, who are you or anyone else to decide that this one behavior which (may or may not be) is a product of civilization? After watching that video the impression